The Death of Specialized Skill
Good enough is, by definition, good enough.
NOTE: Within this text, wherever gender is not key to the explanation, I am using the Elverson ey/em construction of the Spivak Pronouns.
In the middle of the Twentieth Century, innovative industries went to great lengths in order to retain their employees for the duration of their working life. Companies like IBM, Ford Motor Company, Honeywell and Lockheed saw employee retention as paramount to their success. In order to promote this goal, these companies offered amenities like health insurance and bonuses, of course, but, we know that they sought long-term employee retention because of another benefit: the now-extinct pension. The pension would provide a healthy fixed income in retirement if, and only if, the employee worked continuously for the company over a long term.
By so doing, the company could more easily retain control over the proprietary methods and processes that gave it an edge over its competition. It could invest in a skilled and well-trained workforce knowing that that training would bear fruit over many years and that transitions from the old employee to the young would be smooth and efficient. It could establish a sustainable corporate culture amplified by the rhythmic recitations of the well-seasoned adherents to that company’s long-term goals. New…
